Thursday, March 31, 2016

If recommendations were implemented, Vancouver
could offer more affordable housing choices

The Cowie Row houses at 33 and Cambie are the only recent example of 'fee-simple' row houses in Vancouver. Pity!

Hardly a
day goes by when there isn’t a story in the newspapers, on radio or TV, about
Vancouver’s affordable housing crisis. Over the
past few weeks we’ve heard about “shadow flipping” by unscrupulous real estate
agents, disagreement over the precise number of vacant houses and apartments
and the negative impacts of money laundering and foreign investment on house
prices.

These are
important issues and worthy of further investigation and remedial actions.
However, regardless of what steps are taken, they will not significantly reduce
the price of housing in Vancouver.

So then
the question is: Can we do anything that will make a difference?

To
address this, it’s worthwhile looking back four years to March 2012, when Mayor
Gregor Robertson and Olga Ilich, who co-chaired the Mayor’s Task Force on Housing Affordability,
issued their first report. This
report set out four “quick start actions”: fast-track development applications
for affordable rental and ownership housing, use the Cambie Corridor
redevelopment as a model for inclusionary zoning, (a form of zoning that
requires affordable housing to be included within market developments), and use
city-owned land to leverage partnerships with non-profit and co-ops to create
affordable rental housing.

Task
force members were encouraged to use their influence with the federal
government to advocate for enhanced tax incentives for new rental housing and
to convince the provincial government to streamline the delivery of “fee
simple” row housing. Fee simple row houses are individually owned, like
single-family houses, and not part of a condominium.

There
were some successes. Ilich and former city councillor Suzanne Anton convinced
the provincial government to change land title legislation to make it easier to
build fee-simple row housing. However, the federal Conservative government did
not budge on offering tax incentives for rental housing.

Sadly,
fast-tracking rental housing applications has not happened. At a recent Urban
Development Institute workshop intended to encourage the construction of more
rental housing, local developers complained to a city representative that
rental housing proposals are still taking more than three years to get
approved.The same
holds true for construction of non-profit rental housing, some of which is only
just getting underway on four city-owned properties, three years later.

In June
2012, the task force issued another report that looked, in part, at how to
decrease housing development costs. This begs the question whether lower costs
automatically translate into lower prices and rents.

Task
force members correctly noted that lower costs can result in lower prices,
especially when there is sufficient supply and competition in the marketplace.
Sadly, this has not happened.

They also
noted that within Vancouver most new housing generally comprises two major
forms — single-family homes and apartment buildings.

There is
little else in the housing continuum to meet the needs of families and smaller
households. This is because the city’s zoning and regulatory framework
generally does not allow many of the housing forms found elsewhere around the
world — or across the country or even within the Metro region.

These
include townhouses, stacked townhouses, clustered housing, and other options
such as family-sized laneway housing.

In the
report, the task force noted, “simplifying land use regulations and facilitating
a more flexible and creative dialogue between developers and the City would
result in more housing diversity that could meet our affordability challenges.”

So has
this happened? It is starting to happen in a few neighbourhoods, including
Marpole. However, the number of multi-family zoned sites is so limited, prices
have not dropped. Moreover, single-family lots have become so expensive it is
difficult to create affordable multi-family housing, even when they are
rezoned.

The
mayor’s task force presented many excellent recommendations. Housing experts
are convinced that if they were systematically reviewed and implemented,
Vancouver could most definitely offer more affordable housing choices.

On April
6 at SFU Harbour Centre, I am presenting a lecture titled 12 New Affordable
Housing Ideas, many of which are taken directly from the mayor’s task force
reports.

The
lecture is free, but you will need to register at sfu.ca/continuing-studies.ca. I hope
some of you will join me. For those who cannot, watch for future columns.

Note: I understand the talk is now sold out but a wait list is being kept. If you are interested, please add your name to the list since arrangements are being made to 'simulcast' the talk in an experimental manner, but only to those on the wait list!

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

It's not often that I get an invitation to the opening of a friend's art museum, but that's what happened earlier this month. While much has been written about Michael Audain's most generous and impressive gift to Whistler and the people of British Columbia, I wanted to share a few personal anecdotes and photos.

It's difficult to get the RCMP to march on command for a photo, but that's what happened here!

One of the most surprising things about Michael's decision to build
the museum in Whistler is that he really had no prior connection to
the community before deciding to locate there. He's not a
skier; and unlike his colleagues Nat Bosa, Moh Faris, Victor Setton or
Joe Houssian, he never built a project there. He didn't even own a
cabin.

But Michael had a friend with a longstanding
connection to Whistler, Jim Moodie. Once a principal of Sutcliffe Griggs
Moodie, Jim was very involved with the creation of Whistler as we know
it today. He is a skier. He does own a cabin. And over the years, he has
done a lot for Whistler.

His Whistler Olympic Village
(well, it wasn't just his....Eric Martin and a lot of other people
helped out) didn't make headlines in the Vancouver Sun, because it was
so very successful.

Jim knew Michael wanted to build an Art Museum to share his extensive collection; and while there appeared to be
other, more logical locations, Jim had the foresight to appreciate that
Whistler could be an exceptional venue. And he was right.

Not
only did Jim help locate the museum at Whistler, he also worked with
Michael and his team in overseeing the project from beginning to end. Today he serves as Vice-Chair of the Audain Art Museum Board.

While
the people who work behind the scenes are not always recognized, some
of the loudest applause at the opening gala were for Jim, because most
of the people in attendance knew how much he had contributed to the
creation of this wonderful legacy.

Chor Leone was a surprised guest at the opening gala. It is probably the first time they have sung in front of cedars

Michael Audain and Yoshi Karasawa enjoyed the opening as much as their guests

Michael says he'll miss these masks....they were like good friends in his home

While not everyone thought these were a good use of golf bags, they were wrong. Works by Brian Jungen

This view through the crystal glass will only get better when the landscaping is completed.

Jim Moodie and a friend.

As noted in the brochure handed out at the opening, The Audain Art Museum was established for the purpose of bringing the art of British Columbia from early times to the present day to the attention of the public from our province and beyond. Visitors will be exposed to a collection of art that will surprise and enthrall. Plus temporary exhibitions will feature art from around the world.

The museum is now open to the public. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend that you go before the crowds arrive this summer.

Monday, March 21, 2016

One
of the enjoyable challenges of this column is choosing the topic to write
about. Last week, three stories caught my attention.

The
first was the release of the City of Vancouver study on vacant housing. When
CBC called to ask for my initial observations, I had to confess I was surprised
by the results. I
was not sure if this was because the methodology and conclusions were wrong, or
whether I, like so many other Vancouverites, had been duped into believing
there were far more vacant units than there actually are.

I
suspect the number of vacant units is higher than reported. Nonetheless, what
is clear from this report is that regardless of the precise number, this is not
the main cause of Vancouver’s housing affordability problems.

The
second story was the announcement that the City of Vancouver and CP Rail had
reached an agreement on the purchase and sale of the Arbutus Corridor. While I
would have preferred a deal that did not require so much up-front money, I was
generally pleased with how the city resolved this long-standing issue. I
was also delighted to see “pop up” city halls on Saturday inviting community
discussion on the future of the corridor.

While
each of these stories warrant further commentary, this week I want to address
the third story. It tells the tale of two Saskatchewan homeless young men put
on a Greyhound bus by the Saskatchewan government, and sent to Vancouver. This
incident introduced many of us to the term Greyhound therapy, known in the
mental health field as the practice by some authorities of buying a ticket on a
Greyhound Lines bus to get rid of someone they would rather not have to look
after.

I
agree with Coun. Kerry Jang, who said that what the Saskatchewan government had
done was “inhumane” and “callous.”

While
I understood Rich Coleman’s comments to the effect that this is a free country
and we cannot really stop people from going from one province to another, I did
not appreciate Christy Clark’s welcoming comments. Would she have said the same
if her colleague Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall was not in the middle of an
election campaign?

The
sad reality is that Vancouver and many B.C. cities are struggling to address
homelessness with inadequate help from Premier Clark. Vancouver’s shelter
facilities are operating at capacity. The night the Union Gospel Mission took
in these two men, it had to turn 12 other homeless people away.

There
was another aspect to this story that disturbed me.

A
local businessman, moved by the TV account of the mens’ arrival, offered one of
them a job. While this was admirable, I could not help but think about other,
more faceless people in Vancouver who are homeless, on disability or welfare,
who would also like a job.

I
learned about their plight first hand during the 2008 election campaign when I
was introduced to an organisation called the Eastside Movement for Business and
Economic Renewal Society (EMBERS).

It
is a community economic development non-profit organization located in
Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. It helps people facing barriers to lead more
productive, fulfilling lives by offering economic and employment opportunities.
This includes job placements, training and support. EMBERS is constantly
seeking job opportunities for its clients.

Vancouver’s
homeless and welfare recipients face complex challenges. Many suffer from
mental illnesses or addictions, or both, that prevent them from holding down
full-time employment. Many have difficulty finding jobs because of their
appearance; their teeth need fixing, they need grooming and suitable clothing.

While
we can continue to build more shelters and housing for the homeless, a better
way to address Vancouver’s homelessness problem is to help people find full or
part-time employment.

EMBERS
and other caring organizations are trying to do this. However, most of us
prefer to avoid dealing with homeless people unless we happen to talk to them,
and get to hear their stories.

While
I was disturbed by the arrival of these two young men from Saskatchewan, if
their story leads to greater assistance for those already here, it may not be
such a bad thing.

Perhaps
we need to regularly profile Vancouver’s homeless on the nightly TV news.

Last
Saturday, I went to see a therapist. No, not that kind of therapist. A real
estate therapist.

Joannah
Connolly does not sit beside a couch. Instead, the editor-in-chief of Real
Estate Weekly and numerous other publications, sits beside a microphone in the
Roundhouse Radio studio. Every Saturday morning, she hosts a call-in show and
invites a guest to join her in addressing listeners’ housing concerns and
questions.

This
week, I was her guest, and we discussed top-of-mind topics for so many
Vancouver residents. What should we do about foreign investment? Should you buy
or rent? If you can’t afford Vancouver, where should you live?

In her
opening editorial, Connolly responded to the province’s recent budget
announcement that it is going to begin collecting data on foreign purchasers of
real estate.

While on
the surface this seems like a reasonable undertaking, Connolly questioned
whether it will be possible to collect accurate data on the citizenship and
country of residence of buyers. She worried this exercise could lead to
misleading information that might do more harm than good.

More
importantly, rather than question where investment came from, she thought we
should accept it, and try and benefit from it. She applauded the recent
proposal from UBC and SFU academics to tax vacant foreign-owned properties,
provided we used the funds to build affordable housing.

As
readers of this column know, I have long questioned the effectiveness of trying
to discourage foreign investment by taxing vacant properties. Instead, we
should enforce our current tax regulations by charging income and capital gains
taxes where due, and not allowing non-residents to claim principal residence
status.

We then
turned to calls. One of the show’s listeners wanted advice on where to buy,
noting she and her sister could not afford to buy in Fairview Slopes or the
Olympic Village, two areas where they both would like to live. Three different
responses came to mind.

The first
option was a shared purchase of a home with her sister, or another household.
Since she mentioned Fairview Slopes, I told her about Fairview Village, a
low-rise development completed in the early 1980s by my former employer Narod
Developments. This development was built under the Multiple Unit Residential
Building (MURB) program, a federal tax-shelter program that encouraged rental
housing construction by offering investors significant tax write-offs. However,
units were strata-titled and could be sold off as condominiums after so many
years.

What was
special about this development was many of the units were designed as
‘co-mingling’ homes. More specifically, by designing each bedroom as a ‘master
bedroom’ with its own ensuite bathroom, and separating the bedrooms from one
another by the living/dining/kitchen area, the units were specifically designed
to be attractive to two separate households willing to share a home.

While
many of us recoil at the thought of having to share a dwelling, I believe this
can be an effective way for households to buy into a market they might not
otherwise afford. Two households sharing a $700,000 property are likely to get
much more than by each purchasing a $350,000 unit.

The
second option was for the listener to select another municipality. I suggested
she consider New Westminster or Port Moody, two municipalities that offer a
high degree of livability and amenities, at a lower price.

Another
choice might be North Vancouver. However, housing costs in North Vancouver have
increased significantly since I first started recommending it as a place for
younger households looking to buy their first home.

The third
option was not to buy, but to rent. While renting does not result in the
housing nest-egg that many North Americans have come to expect, the negative
stigma associated with renting is slowly dissipating.

I pointed
to Germany where 59 per cent of the population rents. (I would add that 62 per
cent of Swiss citizens are renters.) While renting a home can come with its own
challenges, it should not be dismissed at all as a potential option.

Connolly
and I discussed many other things, including my concern that the real

estate
industry and mainstream media are increasingly complicit in creating
Vancouver’s affordable housing crisis. But that’s another story for another
day.